Australia, New Zealand & the Pacific Airline and RPT Rumours & News in Australia, enZed and the Pacific

C130 down NE Cooma

Old 25th Sep 2020, 22:41
  #341 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2000
Location: Alaska, PNG, etc.
Age: 57
Posts: 1,552
Originally Posted by J.O.
Those fires were not very far apart and the conditions were virtually identical.
In fact, they were 58 km apart, according to the ATSB. Were the conditions "identical" ? I don't know, but I have had the experience of being barely able to control an aircraft in mechanical turbulence in mountainous terrain , while conditions were dead calm and smooth less than 10 km away. Perhaps the C-130 crew felt that 58 km was distant enough that there was a possibility that the conditions would be different from the fire they were originally tasked for (and that the 737 tanker had declined to return to), enough of a possibility to warrant having a look. But for certain, they were not tasked to drop retardant on the same fire the other aircrews had turned down, after they had refused (further) operations, whcih was the earlier suggestion.
A Squared is offline  
Old 25th Sep 2020, 22:50
  #342 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2000
Location: Alaska, PNG, etc.
Age: 57
Posts: 1,552
Originally Posted by F-16GUY View Post
Any ideas why an apparently functioning CVR recorder would have recorded the previous flight, but not the accident flight?
The recently released Interim Report report suggests that the CVR may have been inadvertently deactivated in the past (The previous May) by having tripped the inertial switch perhaps on a hard landing. And that this did not come to anyone's attention as a check of the CVR function is not on the checklist used so the CVR remained switched off.
A Squared is offline  
Old 27th Sep 2020, 09:46
  #343 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: The Hague
Posts: 70
Originally Posted by Connedrod View Post

the nsw rfs have written into there contracts agaist the act that they must report all incidents to them first and then they will decide if they will pass them onto Casa, this is clearly agaist the act.
Surely CASA is aware of this ?

What action has it taken ?
Bellthorpe is offline  
Old 27th Sep 2020, 10:01
  #344 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Australia/India
Posts: 3,276
What law says that incidents have to be reported to CASA?
Lead Balloon is offline  
Old 27th Sep 2020, 11:59
  #345 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2016
Location: Sunshine Coast
Posts: 270
Originally Posted by Bellthorpe View Post
Surely CASA is aware of this ?

What action has it taken ?
The template supply agreement for the provision of aviation services to the NSW Rural Fire Service does not restrict the supplier from making reports to CASA. The agreement requires that the supplier, inter alia,
  • demonstrates that it has a suitable CASA issued AOC,
  • maintains a Safety Management System that meets both the NSW RFS and CASA standards, and
  • complies with the NSW Interagency Aviation Standard Operating Procedures.

The NSW Interagency Aviation Standard Operating Procedures include section 2.7 Accident, Incident, Occurrence and Near Miss Reporting. It quite clearly and specifically states that:
The pilot, aircraft owner or operator are responsible for ensuring the reporting of an accident, incident, occurrence or near miss to the ATSB. Agency personnel shall report to the SAD and dispatching Agency, for the reporting of an accident, incident, occurrence or near miss.
The SAD is the State Air Desk, the state level multi agency team responsible for coordination of aircraft operations.

While there is a requirement in the NSW RFS agreement for the supplier to
report accidents, incidents or near misses to NSW RFS whether or not they occur during the supply of the Services in relation to maintenance/management of NSW RFS Owned Aircraft, or during a time the Supplier was performing non-NSW RFS work.
there is no restriction on the supplier from complying with legislative requirements or the requirements of the NSW Interagency Aviation SOP.

It's the old story that when you read something posted on PPRuNe.org that sounds like nonsense, it probably is.
MickG0105 is online now  
Old 28th Sep 2020, 07:24
  #346 (permalink)  
601
 
Join Date: Mar 1999
Location: Brisbane, Qld, Australia
Age: 74
Posts: 1,179
What law says that incidents have to be reported to CASA?
CASA do not investigate accidents. ATSB do as CASA may be part of the problem.
601 is offline  
Old 28th Sep 2020, 16:04
  #347 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: On the dark side of the moon
Posts: 960
Originally Posted by A Squared View Post
I have had the experience of being barely able to control an aircraft in mechanical turbulence in mountainous terrain , while conditions were dead calm and smooth less than 10 km away.
Were both areas mountainous and under the influence of a strong flow due to the local airmass at the time? I'd find that very hard to believe.
J.O. is offline  
Old 28th Sep 2020, 22:33
  #348 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2014
Location: SE Australia
Posts: 93
Originally Posted by J.O. View Post
Were both areas mountainous and under the influence of a strong flow due to the local airmass at the time? I'd find that very hard to believe.
Mountainous is a relative term in Australia but yes both were close to and affected by the Brindabella Range. Adaminaby basically to the south and the crash site more to the east. Local conditions can, and do, vary significantly.

SRFred is offline  
Old 29th Sep 2020, 00:42
  #349 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Australia/India
Posts: 3,276
Originally Posted by 601 View Post
CASA do not investigate accidents. ATSB do as CASA may be part of the problem.
CASA may indeed be part of the problem. But long gone are the days that ATSB properly investigated CASA. From this ATSB Report: https://www.atsb.gov.au/media/577843...7_final-v2.pdf with bolding added by me.

Some operations manual parts are ‘accepted’ by CASA, while some are ‘approved’ by CASA. The operations manual part C, the training and checking manual, which contained the incorrect procedure for simulating an engine failure in a turboprop aircraft (see the section titled Engine failure simulation), was an example of a part that must be approved by CASA.
...
Despite the operator’s procedure being approved by the Civil Aviation Safety Authority (CASA), reducing the power to flight idle on a turboprop aircraft is not representative of the drag associated with a real engine failure as it does not take account of the beneficial effect of auto-feather/negative torque sensing systems. Consequently, had flight idle been selected it would have created significantly more drag on the ‘failed’ engine, making it more difficult to control the aircraft and achieve the expected OEI performance. While the operator’s procedure only required use of this power setting during the initial ‘phase one’ checks (which would be expected to be completed in less than 30 seconds), it has been a contributing factor to previous asymmetric loss of control accidents (for example AO-2010-019 in the section titled Related occurrences).

The ATSB sought information from CASA regarding the circumstances under which the incorrect procedure was approved for use by the operator. Despite this request, no information was provided by CASA. Consequently, the ATSB was unable to determine whether the approval of incorrect information was an isolated human error or symptomatic of a systemic deficiency with the approval process.
Lead Balloon is offline  
Old 29th Sep 2020, 02:38
  #350 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: N/A
Posts: 3,547
the ATSB was unable to determine whether the approval of incorrect information was an isolated human error or symptomatic of a systemic deficiency with the approval process
Odds are we could guess the correct answer.
megan is offline  
Old 29th Sep 2020, 03:00
  #351 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: On the dark side of the moon
Posts: 960
Originally Posted by SRFred View Post
Mountainous is a relative term in Australia but yes both were close to and affected by the Brindabella Range. Adaminaby basically to the south and the crash site more to the east. Local conditions can, and do, vary significantly.
This is all but irrelevant. The videos taken by fire crew on the ground were a clear indicator that the winds were strong and gusting. The ATSB interim report says same.

Last edited by J.O.; 29th Sep 2020 at 19:51.
J.O. is offline  
Old 29th Sep 2020, 04:58
  #352 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: N/A
Posts: 3,547
The video taken by fire crew on the ground were a clear indicator that the winds were strong and gusting
Explaining the 55° bank when hitting the first obstacle (tree) is difficult otherwise IMHO.
megan is offline  

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off


Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service - Do Not Sell My Personal Information -

Copyright © 2018 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.